Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:50PM   Printer-friendly
from the opt-out-of-your-commute-and-job dept.

Submitted via IRC for Fnord666

LA to become the first city to use body scanners in rail transit systems

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority just announced its plans to become the first city to use portable body scanners in its subway and light-rail systems to help detect the presence of explosive devices.

"We're dealing with persistent threats to our transportation systems in our country," TSA administrator David Pekoske in a statement. "Our job is to ensure security in the transportation systems so that a terrorist incident does not happen on our watch."

The portable scanners will begin rolling out in a few months, the executive director of security for the LA Metro Alex Wiggins said yesterday. According to the AP, the scanners will be able to conduct full-body scans from 30 feet away and are capable of scanning more than 2,000 passengers per hour.

[...] The city is one of several in which the TSA has piloted these new body scanners, although LA will be the first to fully adopt them. The agency has also worked with public transit officials from San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit, New Jersey's transit system, as well as Amtrak stations at New York's Penn Station and DC's Union Station. Wiggins assured passengers that screenings in the LA Metro would be well-marked and that those choosing to opt out could do so by leaving the station.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Board Approves Surveillance Oversight Policy 19 comments

Bay Area transit system approves new surveillance-oversight policy

On Thursday, the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Board of Directors voted to approve a new policy that requires that it be notified if the local police department wishes to acquire new surveillance equipment.

BART is one of the largest mass transit agencies in northern California, with a system that stretches from the San Francisco International Airport, through San Francisco itself, across to Oakland, north to Antioch and south to Fremont—adjacent to Silicon Valley. This new policy puts it in line with a number of other regional cities that impose community oversight on the acquisition and use of surveillance technology. It is believed to be one of the first, if not the first, such policies for a transportation agency in the nation.

[...] The new BART policy was approved just one day after the Bay Area News Group reported that BART police had been using license plate readers at the parking garage at MacArthur station in Oakland for several months beginning in January 2017. The data collected was, in turn, shared with a "fusion center" of federal law enforcement data known as the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center.

Somehow, the MacArthur license plate reader (LPR) system was installed months after the Board had voted in 2016 to delay installation of the high-speed scanners until a policy for their use could be drafted.

Related: California Senate Bill Could Thwart Automated License Plate Readers
California Senate Rejects License Plate Privacy Shield Bill
Forget Scanning License Plates; Cops Will Soon ID You Via Your Roof Rack
Los Angeles to Become the First City to Use Body Scanners in Rail Transit Systems
California Officials Admit to Using License Plate Readers to Monitor Welfare Recipients


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:54PM (29 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:54PM (#722458)

    Again and again, the unwashed masses prove that it's vile experience to live amongst them.

    Thus, increasingly, a strong owner needs to assert his control:

    • The Socialists will set up their draconian, centralized police state.
    • The Capitalists will set up their own, private worlds.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:08PM (28 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:08PM (#722465)

      Sadly you fail to realize the capitalists are the ones driving these things, they love selling defense/offense tech and use corruption to get politicians to sell. Also, socialist doesn't mean what you think it means.

      Anyway, I will agree that the world is becoming pretty vile and I'll be avoiding major cities as much as I can.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:19PM (6 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:19PM (#722475)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

        • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:51PM (5 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:51PM (#722506)

          "Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist."
          Bullshit. It does not matter where the money comes from.

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:14PM (4 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:14PM (#722515)

            Capitalism is the philosophy that every disputed resource should be assigned a well-defined owner (so as end disputes); when a resource has an owner, then that resource is considered the owner's "capital", and ownership must change only according to voluntary agreement.

            If you can point a gun at someone and then just decree that a resource is now yours, then that means there is actually no such thing as ownership; capitalism doesn't allow for taxation—capitalism doesn't allow for a government, and requires "do as we previously agreed" cooperation rather than "do as I say" coercion.

            • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:09AM (3 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:09AM (#722608)
              And once you have somehow gotten ownership of something, who the hell is going to ENFORCE your ownership of the said thing? Who the hell is going to force anyone to abide by the terms of ANY "voluntary agreement"? If I have bigger guns than you, I am just going to laugh and then blow your brains out when you come by to tell me to "do as we previously agreed". I will do whatever advances MY interests, and if there is nothing to stop me from using any means necessary to do so, then I can enforce "do as I say" coercion whether you like it or not! Don't like it? Eat a bullet! The only way ownership of any disputed resource can be indisputably assigned a well-defined owner is by the barrel of a gun. Now, would you rather have that gun in the hands of a well-defined entity somewhat answerable to those under it (i.e. a government), or dispersed here and there and everywhere? There are ongoing experiments in the latter in various places around the world. Please move to Mogadishu if you feel that is preferable.
              • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:26AM (2 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:26AM (#722613)
                • Capitalism is a philosophy; you can look at an aspect of society and say whether or not it adheres to capitalism—government doesn't adhere, and thus proponents of capitalism are compelled to look for alternatives to government.

                • Clearly, there's a market for enforcement.

                  It is in the interest of a capitalist to fund some means of enforcement, but why should there be a monopoly on enforcement? Indeed, the most robust separation of powers is competition among service providers.

                • Queen Elizabeth I didn't want to assassinate Mary (Queen of Scots), because it would set a precedent for monarchs assassinating each other and thereby undermine her own monarchy.

                  Similarly, it is naturally in the interest of a capitalist to abide by agreements, because to breach an agreement is to undermine one's own property rights.

                  Furthermore, the best kind of contract is one that specifies the rules for [practically] every case; under such a contract, it is not possible to breach it, because each case (and the subsequent enforcement interactions that it compels) have been agreed upon.

                • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:33AM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:33AM (#722655)

                  It is in the interest of a capitalist to fund some means of enforcement, but why should there be a monopoly on enforcement? Indeed, the most robust separation of powers is competition among service providers.

                  You know that very idea is being tried as we speak in a place on the horn of Africa called Somalia. I wonder how well that "robust separation of powers" is working out for them.

                  And again, what are these "property rights" of which you speak? Property rights are completely unnatural, and can only exist if there is force imposed to enforce them. Again, if I have bigger guns than you, I'll just blow your brains out and take what you thought of as your "property". I can breach any agreement I like if I have enough force at my disposal, and how on earth would that undermine my "property rights"? It would rather strengthen them, because I gain access to more resources and get stronger that way!

                  Any contract can be breached by guns. The one case that your contract can never cover is what happens when I put a bullet in your brain.

                  • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:43AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:43AM (#722660)

                    Furthermore, the warlords that emerged from the already authoritarian culture are just forms of government—they are certainly not adherents of Capitalism.

                    That being said, it is competition among those warlords that has kept them in check, and the collapse of the communist State has given way to the rise of old systems of quasi-capitalist trade, the results of which have been an astonishing improvement in the quality of life, even compared to the situations in neighboring countries where there have been more "stable" States.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:27PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:27PM (#722482)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:40PM

        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:40PM (#722498) Homepage Journal

        The fishing's usually crap in cities anyway.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:09PM (#722512)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:31PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:31PM (#722527)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:37PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:37PM (#722531)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:41PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:41PM (#722533)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:50PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:50PM (#722538)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:54PM (#722539)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:59PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:59PM (#722544)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:22PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:22PM (#722556)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:40PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:40PM (#722570)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:44PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:44PM (#722575)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:48PM (#722578)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:14AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:14AM (#722611)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:33AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @12:33AM (#722614)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:08AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:08AM (#722646)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:46AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @02:46AM (#722662)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @03:28AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @03:28AM (#722678)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:26PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:26PM (#722849)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @08:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @08:35PM (#722928)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18 2018, @05:18PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 18 2018, @05:18PM (#723153)

        Tax-funded operations are fundamentally non-capitalist.

        The problem is not capitalism, but rather government; it is not the case that capitalists corrupt government, but rather it is the case that government corrupts capitalists.

        If your income depends on taking resources from people at the point of a gun (e.g., taxation), then you are NOT a capitalist.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:11PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:11PM (#722469)

    That doesn't sound like opting out of the screening.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by DannyB on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:24PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:24PM (#722478) Journal

      TSA Screamer: Sir, can you step over here to this secondary area?
      Citizen: Maybe you didn't hear me. I'm opting out.
      TSA Screamer: I need you to step over here to the "opt out" area.
      Citizen: But I'm opting out of your Rapiscan (rape-ih-scan) scanners.
      TSA Screamer: You can't opt out of opting out. Please step over here to the groping area.

      --
      When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:18PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:18PM (#722473)

    We absolutely must have this technology ASAP - look how many people are killed in terrorist attacks on the Metro every day!

    Why yes, I do have shares in the company that makes them, and Trump is a close relative of mine.

    • (Score: 2, Redundant) by DannyB on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:30PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:30PM (#722486) Journal

      This technology is faster and more efficient than asking "your papers please" to every traveler. Especially during rush hour.

      TSA Screamer: Your papers please!
      Traveler: (hands over passport, driver license, birth certificate, social security card, library card)
      TSA Screamer: Your papers are not in order!
      Traveler: Okay, let me re-arrange them into a different order.
      TSA Screamer: vee no have zee time foe zis!

      --
      When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:49PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:49PM (#722504)

      And what about that risk of flying the train into a building or other structure!!! Haven't you seen Die Hard 3 or Skyfall??? Obviously there are lives at stake here that scanning will save! Obviously!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:54PM (#722507)

        Oh, and I forgot - what about Wanted or Speed? Yes, we need the protection!!!

  • (Score: 4, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:42PM (8 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:42PM (#722499) Homepage Journal

    You know why they're using body scanners instead of metal detectors, right? Metal detectors won't find straws.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by MostCynical on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:23PM (1 child)

    by MostCynical (2589) on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:23PM (#722523) Journal

    the only real threat to American travellers is the TSA?

    --
    "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @01:51AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @01:51AM (#722639)

      Pretty much. Other countries can keep terrorists from messing with planes without making people take off their shoes and get sexually assaulted.

      The whole point of this is to keep people scared and keep money flowing to the military-industrial complex. It has absolutely nothing to do with actual safety otherwise there'd be nationwide gun control regulations to keep known dangerous people from getting their hands on any weapons.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by edinlinux on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:53PM (2 children)

    by edinlinux (4637) on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:53PM (#722603)

    It would be nice if they spent money on more important things like staffing the stations with real live humans (I couldn't find a soul on staff anywhere last time I was there..no platform staff, no ticket staff (people just jumped over the wickets without paying), and homeless living in the stations.

    Toilets and trains that ran on (even somewhat) time would be nice too.. but maybe that's asking too much..

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:08PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:08PM (#722843)

      At last a sensible comment!

      Those who use public transport in LA (and I am one) just want the damn thing to work. All this high-brow nonsense about Urr Freedom is irrelevant and I'm guessing promulgated by snoot-nosed pricks who made $2m in bitcoin/random historical fluke who think they're genius.

      The only thing about this technology that affects users of public transport is: how much worse does it make my day? By which I mean, delays, breakdowns, cost, hassle. GUARONTEED it will make all these things worse - but how much worse? Your precious Freeeedom won't make the list, which is why you work at home in your bitcoin paid-for log cabin. Stay there - don't come out, it's DANGEROUS out here.

    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday August 17 2018, @07:57PM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Friday August 17 2018, @07:57PM (#722918)

      like staffing the stations with real live humans ... and homeless living in the stations.

      A problem and solution all in one!

(1)